Further Education &Training Colleges Amendment Bill, Higher Education and Training Laws Amendment Bill: public and Departmental submissions

Meeting report

Higher Education and Training Laws Amendment Bill: Further submission by Department of Higher Education and Training
Mr Eben Boshoff, Chief Director: Legal and Legislative Services, Department of Higher Education and Training, presented the Further Submission of that Department (DHET or the Department) on the Higher Education and Training Laws Amendment Bill (HE Bill). Mr Boshoff stated that this followed an earlier meeting with the Committee, and DHET now wanted to propose new inclusions into the Bill.

DHET proposed that a new clause 4 be introduced, to amend section 41A of the existing Higher Education Act 101 of 1997 (the Act). It was intended to repeal subsections (1) and (2), dealing wih the appointment of an Administrator. The content of these subsections would then be dealt with in the provisions around the Independent Assessor, which would allow for more detail, in the proposed new sections 49B-E.

DHET also proposed a new clause 5, to introduce a new section 45A into the Act. This section would deal with the Independent Assessor’s power to conduct investigations into complaints, the format and procedure for the complaints and other matters, and formed an important basis for appointment of the Administrator.

DHET then proposed that a new clause 6 would insert a new section 45B(1) into the Act, dealing with the Independent Assessor’s power to enter or authorise any person to enter into the premises of a public higher education institution, for the purposes of conducting an investigation.

A new clause 7 would amend the existing section 47(b) and (c) of the Act, by adding the words ‘together with the reason upon which these findings were based’ and ‘and the reasons why the measures were needed’ respectively.

A new clause 8 would provide a new section 49A in the Act, which would empower the Minister of Higher Education and Training to issue a directive to the Council of a public higher education institution, to take actions specified by the Minister, in circumstances where the institution was in financial difficulty, being mismanaged, was unable to perform its functions effectively due to dissension among board members, had acted unfairly or in a discriminatory or inequitable way towards a person to whom it owed a statutory duty, had failed to comply with any law or other Ministerial directive, or had obstructed the Minister or an authorised representative from performing a function in terms of the Act.

A new clause 9 was intended to introduce a new section 49B into the Act. This would deal with the appointment and functions of an Administrator, and set out the circumstances in which an administrator could be appointed to administer of a public higher education institution.

A new clause 10 would insert a new section 49C into the Act, and would allow an administrator to appoint suitable persons to assist him/her in the performance of duties.

A new clause 11 would insert a new section 49D, which would deal with the remuneration and allowances of an administrator and any person appointed by an administrator.

Finally, DHET recommended the insertion of a new clause 12 to provide for a new section 47E in the Act, dealing with the dissolution of a Council of a public higher education institution.

Submission by Higher Education South Africa (HESA)
Mr Hugh Amoore, Board Member, Higher Education South Africa (HESA), outlined the four concerns of HESA on the Bill. HESA did not oppose the proposed amendment to section 38(A) of the Higher Education Act 1997. However, it was concerned about the powers and functions of the proposed National Institutes for Higher Education (NIHEs), and felt that if their mandate, powers and functions were not clarified in the Act, there was a risk that their activities could encroach into the purposes and functions that were within the remit of universities and other relevant bodies such as Science Councils. There should also be mechanisms in the Bill to forge possible collaboration between the NIHEs and public universities, particularly in the provinces where the National Institutes were to be established. This would minimise a possible duplication of effort between public universities and the proposed institutes.

HESA was also concerned about the provision in section 38C that the Chairperson and all ten members of the Boards would be appointed by the Minister, through a nomination process. HESA proposed that, in the spirit of fostering collaboration with the Institutes and minimising duplication of effort, the Board of each National Institute should include at least two representatives from the higher education sector, who would have detailed knowledge and be able to contribute meaningfully to discussions on the sector.

HESA was also worried about the funding of the NIHEs, particularly in light of reduced State allocations to public universities. HESA proposed that the Bill should clarify the funding instruments and mechanisms available for these Institutes. It also called for an assurance from government that the current funding framework for universities would not be used to cover the costs of running the Institutes. Sufficient safeguards should be provided to ensure that the baseline allocations and additional funding for public universities were not compromised as a result of the establishment of the NIHEs. HESA also urged that there should not be a proliferation of these Institutes.

Finally, HESA asked that the term ‘National Institute for Higher Education’ be defined, to provide clarity on the difference between these NIHEs, and other higher education institutes.

Discussion
Mr C Moni (ANC) agreed that there did not seem to be clarity on the funding, and asked for advice from HESA.

Ms N Gina (ANC) asked how the Institutes were being funded presently, and whether HESA was satisfied with that. She agreed that clarity should be provided on the purpose of the NIHEs.

Mr Amoore stated that HESA was concerned that the establishment of the National Institutes under the proposed sections 38B(b) and (c) would in fact amount to a duplication of the roles of universities and the Council of Higher Education (CHE). HESA was also worried that a proliferation of these NIHEs would affect the funding baseline of public universities.

Mr Boshoff stated that section 39 of the Act provided the funding framework, and for preparation of a public document on how the process would work. He assured HESA that funding of NIHEs would not adversely affect the baseline funding of public universities.

Further Education and Training Laws Amendment Bill (FET Bill)
Submission by the Workers’ College
Mr Kessie Moodley, Director, Workers’ College noted that this body was a trade union and community education organisation that had been in existence since 1992. It delivered accredited diploma programmes and a part-time social science degree, in collaboration with the University of KwaZulu Natal (UKZN).

The Workers’ College was concerned about the amendments to section 1 of the Further Education and Training (FET) Act. The Bill sought to amend the definition of ‘college’, and to define a ‘public college’ as either a technical and vocational education and training college, or a community education and training college. Mr Moodley suggested that it should also include ‘civil society education organisations’, because they had, over the years, designed and conducted educational programmes for civil society and social activists. These programmes developed social competencies necessary for the building of socio-political and economic justice, as well as skills that enabled ordinary citizens to acquire and produce knowledge and improve their functioning in various facets of life. Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) was an essential component of these programmes, and the South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA) had also recognised the approach of the Workers’ College.

He summarised that the educational practices of the Workers’ College had resulted in tremendous achievements in terms of research output, teaching and learning methodologies, curriculum development and education for transformation. Some civil society organisations were currently providing diploma and degree programmes that were either accredited by mainstream higher education public institutions, or were run jointly with them. They were bringing about political, social and economic change in society, and that was the real basis of education. These organisations were not like other education institutions that recruited students to get fees, and to allow individuals to gain personally. Instead, civil society organisations recruited from people who were already working in the public domain in organisations such as trade unions, and furthered their ability to achieve political and socio-economic change in society.

He noted that organisations such as the Workers’ College enjoyed the support of government Departments such as the DHET and Department of Labour, and their recognition in legislation would add value to the whole post-school approach, and recognise the contribution of the civil society organisations to building a new society, a new education discourse and a new citizenry. He added that the National Skills Development Strategy (NSDS III) and the Green Paper for Post School Education and Training, made constant reference to the recognition and support of worker education and civil society education organisations and initiatives.

Mr Moodley then suggested that the definition of ‘continuing education and training’ in the Bill should be expanded to include levels 1 to 5, because of the fact that many civil society organisations, including the Workers’ College, conducted accredited qualifications to at least level 5. These qualifications provided an important link for adult learners to move into higher education qualifications, and served as bridging courses. He reminded Members that adult learners also would have acquired vast experiences and prior knowledge in their organisations, workplaces and communities, and higher education institutions recognised the value of RPL.

Discussion
Ms N Gina (ANC) asked whether the Workers’ College wanted the government to assist it with funding.

Ms A Lotriet (DA) asked whether Mr Moodley did not think that the Workers’ College already fell within the scope of  ‘a community education and training college’, already included in the definition.

Mr B Bhanga (COPE) asked whether colleges such as the Workers’ College did not fall within the category of Sector Education and training Authorities (SETAs.

Mr Moodley stated that the Department of Labour and the DHET did support Workers’ College, but the issue was geared not to government funding, but to legislative recognition of civil society educational organisations such as the Workers’ College. The definition of a ‘college’ in the Bill was too restrictive as it spoke of adult education and not civil society educational institutions. SETAS were narrower in their scope, being essentially for the development of skills, whilst civil society educational institutions had a more holistic approach to education. He drew the distinction that SETAs trained people, but civil society educational institutions educated people.

Education South Africa (EDUSA)
Mr Steven Smith, Executive Committee member, EDUSA, Mr Shaun Fitzhery, Chairperson, EDUSA, and Mr Gavin Eyre, Executive Committee member, EDUSA, shared the briefing.

Mr Gavin gave a brief overview of the industry in English as a Foreign Language (EFL), saying that it was now a multi-billion dollar global industry, and many thousands of youth (aged 15 to 50) travelled abroad each year to study another language, moving to countries where that language was widely spoken. South Africa competed with other English-speaking destinations such as the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Language training was one of the largest and most valuable education export-educational tourist market segments. The total value of the language travel market, globally, was $8 billion per year, and South Africa currently held about 1.4% market share. There had been a phenomenal increase in foreign-language visitors to South Africa over the past decade.

Mr Smith stated that because of the enormous growth within the EFL industry, EDUSA, an Association of quality language centres, was established in 2002. There were currently around 25 EFL centres in and around Cape Town, and perhaps around 40 nationwide. EDUSA consists of 16 member schools at present, many of which were owned by international chains. EDUSA wanted to represent the EFL industry in South Africa, and allow centres involved with education to benefit from belonging to a national organisation that had national, regional and local interests at heart.

He noted that the English Language Centres operating in South Africa offered courses for general, business, academic and social purposes. He outlined the externally written and awarded examination courses that were offered (see attached presentation) and said that in 2011 the Department of Trade and Industry (dti) had commissioned Urban-Econ Development Economists to compile a composite report on the value of Education Exports and Educational Tourism to the South African economy. This report said that the EFL industry, in 2009, had created 15 698 jobs, and the total value of education exports was R11, 5 billion.

EFL schools were recognised in most foreign countries with an EFL industry, and he outlined the recognition authority in each. However, in South Africa, none of the EFL schools and courses on offer were currently recognised by the Department of Basic Education (DBE), the DHET or SAQA, since there was nothing in the SAQA framework that allowed for such accreditation or certification. EDUSA was therefore requesting recognition by DHET, Umalusi and SAQA. If this was given, the EFL industry would be properly recognised as an industry and niche market for educational tourism in South Africa, enabling it to compete on an equal footing with the EFL industry in other countries. It would also allow for quality assurance and the regulation of the industry, and enable EFL schools to enter into working arrangements or agreements with mainstream universities and colleges. Finally, it would allow EFL schools to issue letters of acceptance or provisional enrolment, which were necessary for students to apply for study visas. He pointed out that at the moment, no Chinese students could get visas, because the South African Embassy in Beijing maintained that EFL schools were not government accredited institutions in South Africa.

Discussion
Ms D Chili (ANC) asked whether the EFL schools were teaching people to master specific languages, and whether they also taught South African Languages.

Ms N Gina asked whether EDUSA had a relationship with the DBE, in relation to language teaching.

Mr Fitzhery stated that the demand in the industry was largely for English. However, many EFL schools in the country did offer other languages such as isiXhosa and European languages. The schools tried to address the demand for a particular language. EDUSA had tried to establish a relationship with the DBE, but was told that since EFL schools offered training to adults, this did not fall within the mandate of the DBE.

South African Women in Co-operatives (SAWICO) submission
Ms Tepsy Nteseoane, President, South African Women in Co-operatives, noted that SAWICO was a body of primarily female, but also about 20% male, Primary Cooperators, who would acknowledge and use their past experiences as opportunities for further learning. SAWICO was guided by the sixth principle of the Cooperatives Act, No 14 of 2005, that encouraged co-operation amongst co-operatives. SAWICO was launched in 2011, at Tshwane, with support of the dti, Small Enterprise Development Agency (SEDA), South African Micro-Finance Apex Fund (SAMAF) and Old Mutual. So far it had representation in the provinces of Gauteng, Mpumalanga, Free State, North-West, and Limpopo. SAWICO aimed to facilitate and co-ordinate programmes that would address stagnation within the cooperative sector. It firmly believed that cooperatives needed activists and economic cadres, to achieve milestones. It was inspired by the women who, in 1956, tirelessly carried the torch to address the struggle for better lives. It aimed to inculcate a true spirit of solidarity amongst societies.

SAWICO dealt with existing and aspiring co-operatives, and its leadership consisted of co-operatives practitioners, whilst its Advisory Council included members from Kenya and Zimbabwe who were professionals in co-operatives. It was affiliated to the apex national body for cooperatives in South Africa, SANACO. It was temporarily sharing offices with SANACO in Visagie Street, Pretoria.

SAWICO essentially aimed to provide a Business Incubator Facility for early stage and start-up co-operatives for co-operative management; business management skills, technical skills  such as beneficiation or agro-processing, process management and quality control, business opportunity identification, regular compliance and mentorship, coaching and after-care services. Ms Nteseoane said that although about 50 000 co-operatives were registered with the Companies and Intellectual Property Commission (CIPC), only about 2 600 were economically viable, and less than 6% of those in operation were compliant with regulations. There was a low survival rate of co-operatives, and they faced challenges such as weaknesses in their governance and institutional structures, leadership and administrative issues, poor management, financial management and record keeping, lack of access to information on finance and other support services, limited access to markets, competition and operational and technical challenges. It believed that an institutional framework was needed to provide strategic and strong visionary leadership.

SAWICO supported the Bill, saying that the inclusion of Vocational and Continuity Education and Training Colleges as well as Community Education and Training Colleges was long overdue. It particularly supported the conversion of existing Continuing Education and Training Colleges and Adult Education and Training Centres into Community Education and Training Centres (CETC). However, SAWICO wanted to be involved in running some of these CETCs, in the form of Cooperative Development Institutes. Ms Nteseoane thought that at least one was needed in each province, in particular to train young women to form and run their cooperative enterprises successfully. SAWICO, as a national structure, was well positioned to access potential learners for such community colleges. It was already led by highly-skilled women who were very conscious of the importance of good institutional governance, as well as the long term benefits of using resources efficiently and effectively. She briefly outlined the challenges in access to funding for empowering women, and said that the current management of FET Colleges did not have a full knowledge or understanding of the concept of cooperatives, and lacked international input on how Cooperative Development Institutes could contribute towards provision of relevant skills and education.

Discussion
Ms Gina asked whether there was any relationship between SAWICO and the Department for Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs. She also enquired how the co-operatives were working with the SETAs and other government departments.

Ms Chili asked when SAWICO was established, whether it was national or regional, and for details of its addresses.

Mr C Moni (ANC) asked whether SAWICO had links with the rural areas, and, amplifying Ms Gina’s question, also wanted to know if it had a relationship with the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries.

Mr B Bhanga asked what SAWICO was doing at the moment to solve the problem of lack of training in co-operatives, to enable them to function successfully as a collective.

Ms Nteseoane stated that SAWICO was a year old, and emerged when Primary Cooperatives came together to form a Secondary Cooperative. It had links with the rural areas, and was helping to develop farms and other business ventures. It constantly trained members in different provinces, and was in the process of approaching the SETAs. It had also approached the Departments of Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs and Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries but had not to date received any financial support. It was a serious organisation that had learnt from past mistakes and was intent in succeeding, if it could get government support.

South African National Apex Co-operative (SANACO) Submission
Mr Ntsie Malao, National Skills Development Facilitator, South African National Apex Co-operative, stated that SANACO was established on 1 October 2009, in Gauteng. In 2008, the dti had organised a Co-operatives Conference attended by co-operatives from all provinces, with the aim of establishing one apex body in the country to represent all operational economic co-operatives, whether Primary or Secondary. This body should also advocate and engage with organs of the State, the private sector and stakeholders on behalf of its members and non members. It was also agreed at that time that co-operatives must be given 30% procurement across all three spheres of government.

SANACO supported the proposed amendment to Bill, agreed that the inclusion of Community Education and training Colleges was overdue, and supported the establishment of the CETCs. SANACO wanted to be involved in running some of these Community Education and Training Centres, once the Bill had been passed, as Cooperatives Development Institutes. It suggested that one was needed in each province. SANACO’s request was motivated by cooperatives’ agreement, in the Cooperatives Strategy, to work to the establishment of a Co-operatives Academy. He pointed out that Co-operative Academies existed in Botswana, Tanzania and Kenya. This Academy should focus on education and training, development and the accreditation of the cooperatives institutions who dealt with training. It would seek to educate cooperative members, managers, employees and board members, as well as practitioners for cooperative development, from the cooperatives movements and government. Its curriculum would range from Adult Basic Education and Training (ABET) to more advanced levels. The apex Cooperatives Academy should also lobby DBE to incorporate cooperatives into the school curriculum, in order to inculcate the culture of co-operation from a very early age.

It was suggested that the Cooperatives Academy should grow from a partnership between the dti and the DHET, with provincial, district and local municipality support. The Academy should also partner with universities in delivering this programme.

Discussion
Mr L Bosman (DA) stated that co-operatives needed training on economic and production management.  There should be a consideration of where SANACO fitted into the existing training framework, and whether a new training framework was needed. Many institutions such as FET Colleges could be used to capacitate the co-operatives.

Ms Chili asked how SANACO was structured, and whether there was a proper gender balance, since there appeared to be only two women in its executive.

Mr Malao agreed that the co-operatives needed economic and management training and this was the purpose that would be served by the proposed Co-operatives Academy. He noted that at the moment, some taxi co-operatives, although they had bank accounts, were paying their revenue into taxi associations that were not registered. He agreed that to some extent some cooperatives training would fit in the current FET structures, but SANACO wanted a specialised Academy for Co-operatives, similar to other countries. In regard to SANACO’s structure he said that although the Executive did not have many women, the majority of SANACO’s members were women, and it had representatives in all the provinces.

Adult Learning Network (ALN) Submission
Mr Archie Mokonane, Chairperson, Adult Learning Network, said that ALN supported the Bill because it promoted the separate identity of the adult education sector, instead of the past “cut and paste” approach from the mainstream, which had not assisted. Adult education was under-funded, with the result that by 2012 it had still not finalised the institutionalisation of operational systems such as recruitment, conditions of Service, infrastructure, relevant and responsive learner qualifications. Adult Learning was not defined in the relevant educator qualifications in the Higher Education Qualifications Framework (HEQF). Increasingly, institutions of higher learning had been scaling down or shutting down altogether the provision of adult educator qualifications.

This was emphasised by high attrition rates in adult educators, low learner intake into the Basic Education levels, and generally low learner performance, with high dropout rates. To date, the performance of the sector, nationally, continued to be under 40%. If the skills development vision had initially placed adult education at the cornerstone of the strategy to accelerate upskilling of the unemployed, this would have been far better. Instead, adult education was being neglected in the institutional landscape. People in many communities struggled to get access to education and training, as the favoured institutions were out of reach. Skills development mainly continued to benefit only a few, and most far-flung communities suffered still from lack of skills that would help them to get employment or to develop SMMEs.

For this reason, ALN was totally in favour of the shift in principle to a greater emphasis on adult education. He noted that this Bill was replacing the concept of ABET with CETC. However, the move to establishing CETCs had other implications. He noted that the Constitution entrenched the right to adult basic education, but it was not certain how the placing of CETCs under an amended FET Colleges Act would affect adult basic education rights, and whether there would be adequate legislative provision to enforce these rights.

Mr Mokonane said that if nothing was specifically included in the legislation to ensure that CETCs would be able to access under-utilised infrastructure in schools and FET Colleges, this could undermine the sector. There should be clear guidelines and prescriptions for the physical structure of a CETC, to avoid a situation that they might be placed in infrastructure that was not conducive to learning or to ensuring the dignity of the citizens wanting to access this education.

Mr Mokonane said that the instructional approach in mainstream education had been taken over into adult education, but this had in fact suffocated innovation and creativity. He recommended that all post school institutions must be accredited to provide their own qualifications, based on their own research and needs. The instructional approach should be geared to acceleration of learning, using various learning methodologies that were not only flexible, but also best suited to adult learning. If the aim was to build strong and empowered communities, the policy shift should result in a paradigm shift and serious attention would have to be paid to adult educator qualifications. This would also then have implications on the type of Conditions of Service envisaged by the sector. ALN also proposed that co-operation be institutionalised with Adult Education and Training stakeholders.

The meeting was adjourned.